China has requested consultations at the World Trade Organization because of the 15 percent additional tariff on Chinese imports that began Sept. 1. The request was circulated in Geneva on Sept. 4. China says the tariffs exceed U.S. bound duty rates and violate Most Favored Nation status rules. China initiated cases after the List 1 and List 3 tariff actions, as well.

The U.S. trade representative is telling the World Trade Organization that the case China brought against the U.S. for Section 301 tariffs should be dropped. "China’s decision to launch this dispute is hypocritical. China is currently retaliating against the United States by imposing duties on most U.S. exports -- over $100 billion of trade. China cannot legitimately challenge measures at issue for being 'unilateral' and WTO-inconsistent, while at the same time openly adopting its own unilateral tariff measures in connection with the very same matter."

Economic cooperation between China and the U.S. is “win-win in nature,” a Chinese Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesperson said Aug. 21. “Our interests have become deeply intertwined.” He was responding to President Donald Trump's lengthy remarks at the White House accusing China of “ripping this country off for 25 years.” American companies do $700 billion in annual sales and make $50 billion in annual profit in China, the spokesperson said. “If one party has been ripping off the other, it would not have been possible to have the highly complementary, deeply integrated and mutually beneficial relationship that we have today.” China and the U.S. “stand to gain from cooperation and lose from confrontation,” he said. “There is nothing to fear in having differences on trade.”

The U.S. did not agree to the legitimacy of an appellate body ruling on how it calculated countervailing duties on Chinese thermal paper, pressure pipe, line pipe, citric acid, lawn groomers, kitchen shelving, oil country tubular goods, wire strand, magnesia bricks, seamless pipe, print graphics, drill pipe, aluminum extrusions, steel cylinders, solar panels, wind towers and steel sinks, according to a Geneva trade official's summary of the Aug. 15 meeting of the World Trade Organization's Dispute Settlement Body.

The newest version of the World Customs Organization Authorized Economic Operator (AEO) compendium includes six new AEO programs, the WCO said in a news release. The document summarizes each AEO program, "comprising information on accreditation criteria, procedures and expected benefits, as well as associated [Mutual Recognition Agreements]." There now are 83 AEO programs, as well as 74 bilateral and four plurilateral mutual recognition agreements, the WCO said. Also new to the guide is information on existing Customs Mutual Assistance Agreements, the WCO said.

CBP issued a notice in the Aug. 7 Customs Bulletin (Vol. 52, No. 27) regarding the dates and draft agenda for the 64th Session of the World Customs Organization’s Harmonized System Committee (HSC), which will meet in Brussels Sept. 18-27. Among other things, the HSC issues classification decisions on the interpretation of the Harmonized System (HS) in the form of published tariff classification opinions or amendments to the Explanatory Notes. It also considers amendments to the legal text of the HS.

Canada appears unlikely to ratify the updated NAFTA before the fall, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told reporters on July 29, according to a CTV report. Canadian officials have said that country aims to move ratification in tandem with the other NAFTA countries (see 1906140047) and the U.S. House of Representatives recently recessed. That will make it tougher for Canada to move forward ahead of its Oct. 21 election. "We of course benefit right now from the existing NAFTA that ensures that Canadians are well-served with good and reliable access to the North American market," Trudeau said. "But we also look forward to ratification of the new NAFTA, but we will do that in line with the American process when it picks up again this fall."

The European Union asked again that the U.S. stop making payments to U.S. firms that petitioned in antidumping and countervailing duties orders, "arguing that every such disbursement was a clear act of non-compliance with the rulings on this matter," a Geneva trade official said, describing a Dispute Body Settlement meeting at the World Trade Organization on July 22. The payments stem from the long-repealed Byrd Amendment, also known as the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000. Even though the amendment was repealed in 2005, and only entries filed before Oct. 1, 2007, are eligible for payments, the distributions continue (see 1905300013 and 1711300025). The U.S. said it is complying with the WTO ruling, and said that the EU's annual retaliation is just $3,356. The U.S. official said that the EU spent more preparing for the presentation than its damages under CDSO.

China believes that trade “frictions” with the U.S. “should be resolved through dialogue and consultation,” a Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesperson said on July 17. He was asked about President Donald Trump’s July 16 Cabinet meeting remarks that the U.S. has a “long way to go” before reaching a trade deal with China and can still impose the threatened List 4 Section 301 tariffs on $325 billion worth of Chinese goods “if we want.” If the U.S. “thinks there is still a long way to go before a deal is concluded, well, as the Chinese saying goes, a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step,” the spokesperson said. “No matter how long the way is, as long as you step forward, you will eventually reach the destination.” In the face of the U.S. threat to impose the List 4 duties, “China will firmly defend its own interests,” the spokesperson said. “If the U.S. does impose new tariffs, that will indeed set new obstacles for the trade talks. There will be an even longer way to go before reaching a deal.”

The U.S. lost its appeal of a 2018 World Trade Organization decision that it had not properly calculated countervailing duties for Chinese pipes, tubular goods, solar panels, aluminum extrusions and other items. China had originally challenged the cases in 2016 -- the cases were brought between 2007 and 2012 (see 1805010071). The earlier ruling held that the U.S. was right to say that Chinese state-owned enterprises count as "public bodies" and therefore their actions can be market distorting. The appeal upheld that element of the case, but also upheld the victories for China. The WTO said that Commerce did not prove specificity in the subsidies for the products, and it also could not show how the SOE inputs distorted market prices. It was not allowed to use other countries' prices as reference points to prove market distortions, the WTO said, unless it had specific evidence that government interference in the market warranted that. The appeal said that countries' ability to use other countries' prices in CVD cases is "very limited."